Reasonable sacking
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• West York sh i re haulier Nichol McKay has been held to have acted reasonably in sacking a driver after his vehicle shed its load of steel sheeting and bars.
A Leeds Industrial Tribunal rejected claims by David Mallinson that his dismissal was unfair because it had not been his fault.
The tribunal was told Mallinson was responsible for the safe and secure loading of his vehicle. He was given a warning in November 1992, when another load was shed, pointing out the consequences of further incidents of that type. It was made plain to him that he should telephone in using his cob phone, and not move his vehicle, if for any reason he felt his load had become insecure.
On 14 September, Mallinson became aware of a problem with his load. Without properly investigating it or phoning for assistance, he drove the vehicle back to the company's depot. Despite the slope on the depot drive and the problem with the load, Mallinson drove into the yard at sufficient speed as to dislodge the load, causing steel sheets to spill out over the yard.
Bearing in mind the previous incident, said the tribunal, the warning Mallinson had been given, and the serious nature of the incident in terms of the possible consequences, it said the company had acted reasonably in summarily dismissing him. Taking into account the circumstances of the case, they did not feel that the company's failure to notify Mallinson of his appeal rights was a procedural defect so serious as to render the dismissal
6
unfair.